Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

plummet expert

Members
  • Posts

    1,672
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by plummet expert

  1. Let's not pretend that the chancellor isn't full of shite...

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-24144844

    ffs... and why are sales and approvals still well below the boom years? Is he thick or does he think we are?

    He does think we are thick. He is nothing more than a man set on trying to win the next election. No thought for the future, the price of living under a roof, the competitiveness f the economy and the pressure on wages and inflation to keep up.

    It is actually really selfish. He will regret it and will be seen for the idiot he obviously is. The Conservatives are no better than Labour.

    The 'growth' based on ultra low and mad interest rates, together with crazy oublic borrowing - itself at likely unsustainable rates and building an unpayable national debt - is going to turn out illusory as usual. This country has no one with any vision, balls or even common sense for the future. No long term thoughts in their heads. Really disheartening.

  2. Not exactly the boom that everyone else is reporting...

    Definitely asking price increases and a few actual increases, but patchy - some homes are coming on and some months or weeks later being reduced. Lots just sitting there. Still homes that are in the right place at the right price sell fast - some new ones going, but I suspect more slowly than developers wish to pretend. The help to buy scheme can't help if your income multiple wont let you buy something for £375-500k which should be about £240-300k - http://www.rightmove.co.uk/developer/branch/Barratt-Homes/The-Fieldings-93880.html

  3. Yep, Gordon delayed a banking default by handing us a sovereign default. And for that the left wing media paint him as some kind of saint.

    History will reflect on the extraordinary lengths the Western economies went to just to keep the whole balloon inflated. History won't be kind if it all pops with even worse consequences than having simply 'got on with the pain' post 2008 then follow.

    It is just as incredible just how long this financial theatre show is playing out. Are we on Act iii of V yet? Or is it still Act ii ?

  4. Hi all, I recently placed a bid on a house and was told there were no other viewers or interested parties. The day I bid, I was told another party had placed a higher bid and asked what I wanted to do.

    It seemed a bit off, and I was wondering what you guys think the chances of a ghost bidder tactic being used? The agent is one of the 'biggest' around. While it may well be someone being kept informed reacting to my bid, I wonder what you guys reckon. Don't want to be bidding against myself.

    These games do happen. offer what you want to pay and no more.

  5. Hi all

    This week I viewed a nice but unremarkable three-bedroom linked detached house in Hertfordshire. Asking price of £300k and on the market for three weeks. Three very similar houses are also for sale on that street: one started at £307k and went to £290k before going SSTC after four months in total; one at £320k for three weeks and one at £285k for two months.

    Sold prices for very similar houses on that street in the last seven years are as follows:

    15th Feb 2011 £267,500

    12th Nov 2010 £245,000

    18th Jun 2010 £249,000

    9th Apr 2010 £245,000

    29th Jan 2010 £240,000

    2nd Jul 2007 £250,000

    5th Jan 2007 £236,000

    29th Nov 2006 £275,000

    All sold prices before 2006 below £250k.

    I strip out the highest and lowest numbers as outliers and decide to offer £250k. The vendor rejects it, as is his right, and I think nothing more of it. Then I get the following e-mail from the EA:

    I understand why he wants my top budget but I don't understand why he cares about the rest of it. Any thoughts?

    Cheers

    Will

    Because no one else has made a better offer? You cannot believe EA's. They may or may not be telling the truth about any price or offer.

  6. Hi!

    My agents work through these guys http://www.glenmead.co.uk/

    So we moved out 3 weeks ago. Landlord told that he will keep £85 because he didn't like the garden. Ok. I don't mind.

    He sent the rest of money to this Glenmead. And they told me that it will take 10 working days to clear the check and they will charge me £114 to "clear the check". I was in shok! £114 to clear the check?! They say I singned for this in the begining.

    Even if I did, just wondering, is it ok to chage so much for nothing?! Its a robbery, isn't it? How to avoid paying them £114? Not the best feeling when such companies treat you like a mushroom :(

    The cost of cheque clearing is simple overcharging - an outrage. I should ask where you signed for it. If its in small print somewhere inconspicuous it may well fall foul of the Unfair Contract Terms Act. See Citizens Advice!

    Point 2. Why id the Landlord having to give 'the rest of the money' to the agent. A deposit should have been placed in the Deposit Scheme BY LAW. If that's been done wrong tell them you will report if all not returned and you dont expect to be charged for the cheque clearing either.

  7. Telegraph 28/1/13

    ' "The Bank is acutely aware of the risk of unsustainable credit and house price growth and will be monitoring it closely," he said in Nottingham on Wednesday.

    "The important thing to recognise is that we now have tools other than interest rates that can be used to contain risks in the property and financial sectors. We are now fully prepared to deploy them if that were needed."

    The Bank could, he said, use its newer tools to recommend that banks and building societies "restrict the terms on which new credit is provided, or even to raise capital requirements on mortgage or other types of lending".

    This would allow the Bank to avoid raising wider interest rates across the economy even as it acted to put the brakes on specific areas. '

    The 'tools other than interest rates' he refers to are lending rules - thse common sense things - 'you can have up to 2.25 your income sir'......At present it is still 4x without batting an eyelid.... WHY OH WHY? IT IS MADNESS. It is causing house prices to fit the lending multiples plus deposit and on two incomes aswell. :ph34r:

  8. I saw that LSL paper and I'm suspicious of the finding that rents have risen by 10% nominal nationally since 2010. It's not something I've seen, experienced or heard of in other stats. I have a few properties I check for rents now and again, and they all say to me that rents are stable or weakening slowly. Also, the central premise linking rent rises with CPI is flawed in my view, it is more meaningful to talk about wages versus rents.

    edit The ONS paper is much closer to my own experiences, directly (places I've previously rented) and indirectly (things I've read here and elsewhere), page 7:

    hir5.jpg

    Many BTLers must be waking up to the idea that the capital gains they have assumed to be in the pipeline are simply not going to materialise anytime soon. As business assets most BTL cannot possibly be justified when yields are as low as most buyers in the last 10 years are getting, and the wage growth required to raise rents is nowhere to be seen.

    A place identical to one I rented in 2007 for £575pcm, went 'let agreed' recently at an asking price of £575/month.

    The owner paid circa £150k for it, they now sell for around £90-£100k.

    Assuming no voids, arrears, and making some generous assumptions of the cost side in the last 6 years:

    Rent £575x12x6 = £41,400

    Mortgage (65%LTV IO 5%) = -£29,000

    Capital 'gain' = -£50,000

    Leasehold fee: -£6,000

    Agent cut: -£3,500

    Stamp duty: -£1,500

    I'm being generous- the mortgage expense could be much more. The striking part is how on generous assumptions, the rent just allows the LL to stay afloat on 'cash' terms, although this assumes 100% occupancy, no arrears, repairs to white goods etc. Probably the hook that gets them to sign on the dotted line. In reality the LL will be well underwater in cash terms, I've little doubt. Casting all that aside that aside only leaves the small matter of the capital 'gain' though. Not far off £700/month in the hole to date. A complete disaster.

    Rents did squeeze up in 20011-12 in SUSSEX but have stabilised and possibly siftening since people are buying a little more -

    10% yes, in the last 4 yrs.

  9. Articles recognises the problems..

    The keywords are 'Affordable Housing'. There is very little in the UK and virtually none in the South. The Coalition are masters of their own idiocy in causing the housing market to stay anchored in cuckoo land. This is then followed by the 'Help to buy' schemes which have nothing to do with helping anyone to buy at an 'affordable' price - just all about having nearly no interest rate payment on a massive loan dreamt up in Fairy Land so the Conservatives can say there is a GROWING ECONOMY!! Where is the rebalancing of the economy?

    They would have had a more balanced and growing economy by now if rates had returned to near normal and house prices had fallen gently but persistently. It would have been better to find ourselves helping people who had bought at the last couple of years of 'top' than paying all this extra HB for ever and ever.

    There is NO COMMON SENSE in British Politics right now. Labour have no clue either. They are all so afraid of the truth and a long term policy. They can't see that our international competitiveness is severely damaged by high living costs. Frankly it is blindingly obvious. SAD :(

  10. A friend heard from a EA today that a large 4 bed property in Derby is being reduced from £209,000 to offers around £185,000

    http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/27436301?search_identifier=33e593051501d72c13f72e250866875a

    The price hasn't been changed yet on the websites.

    That's quite a drop, one off or start of a trend?

    I doubt its a rend at the moment. At any given time there are homes having price adjustments. There are some in Sussex which have dropped £30k or more in recent weeks, but overall you can see more house sale activity and probably the beginning of rising prices here and there. There is a bit of hype in the news because more FTB are back. How long for at these prices and with falling real wages is anybodys guess. You would need a minimum 10 x average uk wages to buy a 3 bed semi in most of Sussex.

  11. Watched and just thought what an incredible achievement. A country wrecked and almost bankrupt from war established a health system and welfare system within a few short years.

    Of course there was Mrs Massive Entitlement but suspect she was picked for the role of pantomine villain. Suspect energy, housing food was all a lot cheaper and the benefits seemed large, Of course we had full employment and plenty of manual factory work,

    Yes, that's the point - the cost of living in Britain was massively less even allowing for inflation generally - these programmes can mislead because the relative price of goods can change a great deal over 70 yrs. Chicken was very expensive while beef was the cheap meat back then. You cannot just fast foward and apply inflation to it. Wages would have been a lot lower then too!

  12. Incredibly naive article in the telegraph today with Dickie explaining away the hopeful (for them/thames water) £29 price increase.

    People can't afford their water rates and are falling in to arrears so jack them up £16 to cover the shortfall!!!

    Only (property ramp) rich foreigners can afford to buy in London so Thames Water must acquire all this prime building land at whatever cost as prices can only go up. Of course cash strapped indigenous proles won't be buying property and the evil, transient renters thst they are they won't be paying their water rates either so add anoither tenner, may as well round this up to thirty quid call it essential upgrades when what the board really want is more cake) then knock a quid off so they can fool the customer into believing they are reakly trying to keep costs/increases down.

    Suck it up southerners butnot the water as thats a rare commodity they'll have you know.

    It's all about old mud. Land prices are rising because of Govt policies - so many policy errors that yet again we are heading towards an unsustainable period of phoney growth with consequences. There are real signs down south that the speed of house sales is actually frighteningly fast in some cases. Its not a good sign - not when nothing has been done to sort out social housing; wages are often stagnant or falling AND borrowing multiples are rising.

  13. So during the school term the children of these needy families receive free meals.

    Which means these people never feed their own children. Ever.

    I find this hard to understand, these people must have some money, what do they spend it on ? My understanding is that food banks are only a temporary short term measure used when , for example. people lose their jobs and there is a delay in receiving benefit. The answer must surely be to pay part of all benefits in vouchers that can only be exchanged for food.

    The problems are coming by a persistent fall in living standards due to wage freezes, or cuts, or lack of job security and rising food prices- plus nil hours contracts. Problems with enormous delays in benefits for people going in and out of short term employment - problems with incredibly low wages for the vast majority of ordinary jobs and ENORMOUS INCREASING RENTS DUE TO THE SUPPLY CRISIS AND MASSIVE HOUSE PRICES. Our housing costs are making a large number of people poor - now Osborne is following his moronic housing pump prime for the next election policy, it's getting worse. He might find less popular support for this policy than he thought out there come 2015. It's not going to rebalance the economy either - the reverse. Banks and lending policy need proper regulation - not people. Funny how all the talk of enforcing a sensible lending policy has disappeared.

    Hard working families as well as those on benefits being required to stump up for the bedroom tax are finding ends not meeting. Most people cannot move to avoid it because actually there isn't anywhere to go. If they swapped with others needing extra room - fine. So often there are children and schools to consider and they can't move away - catchment rules etc.

  14. Why not have a new user group called "property professional" so we all know who they are?

    The problem is, they always deny it, preferring to post as a private individual...... "That's it, I give in, like others on here I thought prices would fall but I was wrong. I'm going to buy now and get on with my life, no more dead money wasted on rent for me".

    It's a great shame. Houses area actually well above the price level reached when the Property market burst in 1989-91. There is no doubt that this govt wants to change the laws of economics. Mark Carney is the gravest threat to long term balanced growth. He is simply encouraging unbalanced growth fuelled by borrowing and asset pumping - mainly property. It was this Govts mantra that they would 'rebalance the economy.' They are far from doing that although it did begin...before rediculous house stimulus policies were put in place.

    We will all pay for this. The generation of rent will have to grow and be very angry they could not buy or even live as their parents did. It is all wrong. Savers are being shafted and effectively taxed by punitively low returns. Pensioners are being fleeced; those saving for a pension or expecting one soon are being fleeced; those want to buy a home are being fleeced. The fact that rates are so low is NOT the answer. The fact that a mortgage may be serviceable is no answer either. On any measure of price comparison, this bubble never properly deflated. The lax control on lending is still present. Our Govt and now Mr Carney are all clueless. This Osborn led housing measure mess, is nothing more than a cynical effort to buy votes. It will backfire medium term.

  15. Thanks for the reply, looks like a trip to the solicitor may be in order to check this out further!

    That's ok. If the LL did not instruct for the S21 notice to be served (as I now understand is the case) then IMO it is a sham and for deriving fees only. Your friend should refuse to pay the the agent and offer the rent as usual - if refused ask for the address of LL or his bank details to pay it direct - tee hee!

  16. Hello,

    A friend of mine has a sixth month rental contract, due to end in 3 months time. He has been told by the EA that the AST can't transform into a rolling contract, and that he will have to pay renewal fees for another 6 month AST, or move out. He has been served with a section 21 notice.

    He would prefer to shift to a rolling contract, but the EA claims they won't offer a rolling contract.

    Is there not some legal requirement for EA's to offer rolling contracts?

    Thanks in advance.

  17. Hello,

    A friend of mine has a sixth month rental contract, due to end in 3 months time. He has been told by the EA that the AST can't transform into a rolling contract, and that he will have to pay renewal fees for another 6 month AST, or move out. He has been served with a section 21 notice.

    He would prefer to shift to a rolling contract, but the EA claims they won't offer a rolling contract.

    Is there not some legal requirement for EA's to offer rolling contracts?

    Thanks in advance.

    I am a lawyer, so you can check this out: There is provision in law for an ASSURED SHORTHOLD CONTRACT to become a periodic assured shorthold automatically. It does this by neither side doing anything and the rent being accepted after the fixed term has expired.

    Unfortunately, as rental agencies want to charge fees every 6 months to tenants and Landlords, they are trying to cause a 'rollover' periodic tenancy to be unavailable. That is why they start saying things which are plainly untrue. They have deliberately served a S21 notice to circumvent the legislation's purpose. A periodic AST still gives the right for LL to serve 2 months notice and the T one months notice. If your friend is being offered a new tenancy, then that is tantamount to the admission the S21 notice is nothing but a device for the agent to collect fees. I would ask for a copy of the LL written instruction to serve him with a S21 notice. Query why it was done if a new tenancy is being offered. It cannot be just to put up the rent either, as that can be done by other notice within the same Tenancy.

    What we need is a brave T to refuse to sign a new agreement in these circs, then refuse to move out in response to the S21 notice stating it is a sham - and offer to pay the rent each month (keeping it for later payment if refused by the agent). If brought to Court, then all correspondence and answers to the Q's I pose should be made available to the Court. If the Court decided the S21 Notice was a sham and device to justify fees, then it would be the case that a periodic Tenancy had been created under the legislation. The Agent may not be acting on the LL instructions, strictly speaking, and probably only interested in their fee. That's why u have heard about regulating these agencies - they do need to make some money to be there atall of course! Lots of T's are very time consuming and tiresome. Lot's of LL's do nothing to maintain premises. Your friend should take his own legal advice as this is just a website.

  18. All they have done is ensure a larger crash and crisis. Its all about passing the buck and avoid the 5h1t hitting the fan whilst you are in power.

    The meddling is taking place to protect the banks any large correction will show the banks are insolvent. All the economic eggs are in property. Naturally everything will be done to ensure the "wealth" is preserved no matter what the cost.

    I have every sympathy with the post! The latest policy to prevent property falling to a sensible price is the 'Help To Buy' Scheme. It has been described as 'moronic' by the head of Societe General. I agree with him! But, yet again our idiot politicians who only have an eye on the next election, have to pump up the property market - which never really corrected. The pump up began when houses were, after a slight fall,

    still on average at the price reached ( adjusted) in 1988 when they crashed good and proper.

    No one - NO ONE - who takes out a 4x inc mortgage today could possibly pay it if rates returned to 7 or 8 % base. Lots of people are only surviving because of these very low rates - and all at the expense of savers who now get negative returns. It's so wrong and damaging - it will damage our long term competitiveness because people need to ern such a lot just to put a roof over their heads. :angry:

  19. EU = uncontrolled mass immigration = soaring house prices.

    Lib, Lab or Cu_nt, they all love Europe. The Tory press will be onside before 2015.

    The fear propaganda has begun. The vested interests are busy priming. pre-EU unemployment = 1 million. After 41 yrs being in it = 2.45 million. They only have one argument and that is fear of losing out with either investment or jobs. All of it is pure baloney. Nobody will stop a full trade agreement being in place so the Eu can carry on sending us 60% of our imports in exchange for only 40% of our exports.

    If you said to the average member of public, "so long as you can carry on trading with Europe, would you prefer to come out and avoid being opart of the United States of Europe?" A large majority would say, lets leave.

    BRITISH POLITICS IS BROKEN OVER THE EU. BOTH LABOUR AND CONS HAVE HALF THEIR PARTY FOR AND AGAINST.

  20. Tescos is good for a one stop shop if you don't know an area. Otherwise, agree that there are better quality suppliers, and lower cost suppliers out there.

    we have shopped in a number of supermarkets with exactly the same list of weeks shopping to see price, quality and therefore value comparison. We set off thinking Morrisons may be cheaper than Tesco - it wasn't - about 2.5% more than Tesco. Sainsburys was about 1.5% more but a few products like meat were a little better overall - but fish much more than tescos and no quality difference. Lidl and Aldi are hard to compare. They both have some quality products but others are certainly not good. We could not buy everything there so comparison is difficult . On the products we could buy, they were a mixed bad of very good to poor. In all not much difference in price for a basket to tesco - although some very good like jam (and lobster - but not in my basket) .

    Waitrose was a good deal more unless you buy all 'basic' products. Some very good quality though. About 4% more than Sainsburys.

    The main attraction of Tesco is the reward scheme which does produce worthwhile gifts - I buy petrol, phones and about 50% of of our annual food there - using their credit card for points in other shops too - set to pay off each month - we get £500+ of restaurant/day out tickets etc for nothing on top. The Sainsbury Nectar card produces about £60 worth of spend a yr by comparison, although I dont buy more than 25% of our petrol there. So there it is - you take a choice and all of it has pros and cons.

  21. Quite an amusing piece - and an interesting comment from Farrage regarding Enoch Powell:

    Obviously, he remains a racist who hates darkies...

    I don't think you understand Farage atall if you say that! He is no racist in any way. In fact the comment that you cannot discuss immigration easily without someone deciding to speak in the way you are is proved true. The party called UKIP believ that we should have borders and not allow anyone to arrive here from EU countries - they should be subject to the same requirements of Americans, Austrakians, canadians or indeed anyone else. We are the second most populated country on earth and cannot absorb endless people. I don't find people are racist in this country - just concerned about space, resources etc.

  22. 'Cracks in the pro-euro consensus are starting to show'

    WSJ

    This is without mentioning the rise and rise of UKIP.

    Is it possible that these parties could soon become a catch-all for protest and discontent? Not simply because EU-led austerity is so deeply unpopular. But because the established parties are all mired in either the current bust or in causing it in the first place. That creates a big political vacuum.

    To boot, most established PIIGS parties are mired in corruption as well. The current slush-fund scandal in Spain should normally have brought down Rajoy's government. But the socialist opposition can barely capitalise while firefighting a scandal of similar gobsmacking corruption in Andalusia.

    There is EU backlash in all this, when its European 'partners' are largely viewed as partners-in-crime.

    Moreover - the big thing - established national parties in bailout countries are being seen as increasingly impotent when faced with Troika diktats and loss of sovereignty. So what's the point of voting for them?

    At the moment, I'm thinking more that political implosion will happen sooner that financial meltdown. It looks like they can fudge figures forever, but denying public sentiment is a bit more difficult.

    What's your take?

    The arrogant govts of Europe are not seeing the erupting south creeping north Euro crisis. UKIP is not just a filler of political vacuum; it is actually reflecting a large % of peoples real views. In this case, the Tories have failed to be Tory, the LibDems have just failed, period. There is no confidence in any old mainstream party. Therefore it is possible to see a change in British politics emerge. Otherwise we are heading towards a hung parliament again. I suspect the British public may not actually bring themselves to vote for Ed Milliband in large enough numbers when they actually have the pencil in their hands.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.